B-21 (C14-2020-0023 - Highway 71 & Mountain Shadows, District 8) — original pdf

Backup

C14-2020-0023 1 ZONING CHANGE REVIEW SHEET CASES: C14-2020-0023 – Highway 71 & Mountain Shadow DISTRICT: 8 ZONING FROM: RR-NP (Tract 1); LR-NP and GR-NP (Tract 2) ZONING TO: MF-1-NP (Tract 1); LR-MU-NP (Tract 2) ADDRESSES: 8709 & 8701 Sky Mountain Drive (Tract 1) and 8732, 8624 & 8722 W. State HWY 71 (Tract 2) SITE AREA: 6.5 acres (Tract 1); 5.5 acres (Tract 2); 12.0 acres (Total) PROPERTY OWNERS: Tract 1: Roberta Hudson Tract 2: THT Holdings LLC, (Senthil Rangaswamy and Prithiviraj Loganathan) AGENT: Metcalfe Wolff Stuart & Williams LLP (Michele Rogerson Lynch) CASE MANAGER: Kate Clark (512-974-1237, kate.clark@austintexas.gov) STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends multifamily residence – limited density – neighborhood plan (MF-1-NP) combining district zoning for Tract 1 and neighborhood commercial – mixed use - neighborhood plan (LR-MU-NP) combining district zoning for Tract 2. For a summary of the basis of staff’s recommendation, see page 2. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION / RECOMMENDATION: June 23, 2020 Scheduled for Planning Commission CITY COUNCIL ACTION: July 30, 2020 Scheduled for City Council ORDINANCE NUMBER: B-211 of 56C14-2020-0023 2 ISSUES: There is an existing public Restrictive Covenant (RC) that covers Tract 2 of this rezoning case. One of the items in this RC is a requirement to extend Mountain Shadows Drive south to State Highway 71 prior to the issuance of any building permits. Residents from the surrounding neighborhood have expressed concerns about this extension and have communicated they are opposed to the rezoning of these properties if that extension is constructed. There is a Restrictive Covenant Amendment (C14-85-288.56(RCA)) that is being processed concurrently with this rezoning case that addresses this issue. Mountain Shadows Drive is shown on the Austin Strategic Mobility Plan (ASMP) to be extended from its current terminus to State Highway 71. At this time, the Austin Transportation Department (ATD) is recommending removing the current language in the existing RC and to defer ROW dedication for this road until submittal of the first subdivision or site plan application. The Applicant has agreed to not take access to the existing Mountain Shadows Drive for this development project. However, they will be constructing a new section of Mountain Shadows Drive from State Highway 71 to their project entrance for their access. They have agreed to only build the portion of the road that will be necessary to provide access for their development and dedicate the remaining ROW to be constructed at a later date. On March 10, 2020 staff received an online petition from the Mountain Shadows Community opposing the rezoning of these properties and the extension of Mountain Shadows Drive, and a letter from the Oak Hill Association of Neighbors (OHAN) supporting their position. Staff discussed the online petition with the organizer and informed them that the City does not recognize online petitions as a “formal petition” as defined in the City Code. Staff sent the original petition organizer information on the City’s petition process. On April 24, 2020 staff received a formal petition opposing the rezoning of these properties from the surrounding neighbors. At that time, the petition area for signatures received was at 4.03%. Many of the signatures that staff received were not within the 200’ petition area. Staff was informed that the Applicants’ Agent was continuing to discuss the proposed development and access to Mountain Shadows Drive with the Mountain Shadows Cove Ownership Association (HOA). On June 15, 2020 staff received a letter from the President of the HOA requesting to rescind the submitted petition and providing a letter of support for the rezoning case. Staff has compared the signatures originally received for the petition to those received rescinding their opposition and have removed those wishing to withdraw their opposition. The new petition area of received signatures is 1.91%. Signatures that were originally received (within and outside of the 200’ boundary) but not withdrawn are still included in the backup. A current map and list of property owners of the petition area and the signatures received to date are included in Exhibit C: Formal Petition. B-212 of 56C14-2020-0023 3 The original opposition letter from OHAN along with all other communication received for this rezoning case is included in Exhibit D: Correspondence Received. The HOA as written to OHAN and requested they withdraw their opposition to the rezoning case. Staff has been informed that OHAN will be meeting later this month to reevaluate their position on the rezoning case and staff will update the case report as necessary. CASE MANAGER COMMENTS: This project consists of two undeveloped tracts comprised of approximately 12.0 acres. Tract 1 is approximately 6.5 acres and is zoned RR-NP. Tract 2 is approximately 5.5 acres and is zoned a combination of LR-NP and GR-NP. To the north of this project are tracts zoned RR-NP and MF-1-NP. Some of these tracts are undeveloped and some are developed with residential uses. Adjacent to the east are tracts zoned MF-1-CO-NP and GR-NP containing civic and multifamily residential uses. South of the site is State Highway 71. To the west are properties zoned AG-NP and MF-1-NP with residential uses. Please refer to Exhibit A: Zoning Map and Exhibit B: Aerial Map. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION: 1. Zoning changes should promote compatibility with adjacent and nearby uses. The applicant is requesting to rezone Tract 1 from RR-NP to MF-1-NP to allow for residential uses. This tract is currently surrounded by MF-1-NP zoned properties. Rezoning this tract to MF- 1-NP would be consistent with the current zoning pattern. The applicant is requesting to rezone Tract 2 from LR-NP and GR-NP to LR-MU-NP to allow for residential uses and provide access to Tract 1 from State Highway 71. Rezoning this tract to LR-MU-NP would provide a transition in zoning and use between State Highway 71 and the existing properties zoned MF-1-NP. EXISTING ZONING AND LAND USES: Zoning Land Uses Site RR-NP, LR-NP and GR-NP Undeveloped North MF-1-NP and RR-NP Residential uses and undeveloped land South Right-of-way and PUD-NP State Highway 71 and multifamily residential East GR-NP and MF-1-CO-NP Fire station, government buildings and multifamily residential West AG-NP and MF-1-NP Residential uses B-213 of 56C14-2020-0023 4 NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING AREA: Oak Hill Combined Neighborhood Plan (West Oak Hill, NP Ordinance No. 20081211-096) TIA: The TIA determination has been deferred to the site plan submittal, when land use and intensity will be finalized. WATERSHED: Williamson Creek (Barton Springs Zone -Contributing Zone) OVERLAYS: Barton Springs Overlay SCHOOLS: Oak Hill Elementary, Small Middle and Austin High Schools NEIGHBORHOOD ORGANIZATIONS Austin Independent School District Aviara HOA Bike Austin City of Rollingwood Covered Bridge Property Owners Friends of Austin Neighborhoods Neighborhood Empowerment Foundation Oak Hill Association of Neighborhoods (OHAN) Oak Hill Neighborhood Plan - COA Liaison AREA CASE HISTORIES: Oak Hill Neighborhood Plan Contact Team Oak Hill Trails Association Ridgeview Save Our Springs Alliance SELTexas Sierra Club, Austin Regional Group Thomas Springs Alliance TNR BCP - Travis County Natural Resources Number Request Commission City Council C14-2011-0038 Mountain Shadows Rezone, Lots K, L and P RR-NP to MF-1-NP To grant MF-1-CO- NP as staff recommended. CO was to limit trips per day. To approve MF-1- CO-NP as Commission recommended. (8/18/11) 8800 Sky Mountain Drive C14-00-2104 Oak Forest 8501-8635 Block of Old Bee Caves Rd I-RR and RR to MF-1-CO To approve MF-1-CO as Commission recommended. (11/30/00) To grant MF-1-CO as staff recommended. CO was to limit trips per day and prohibit access to Mountain Crest Drive and Sky Mountain Drive. B-214 of 56C14-2020-0023 5 Number Request Commission City Council C14-85-288.115 RR to MF-1 To grant MF-1 as staff recommended with public restrictive covenant. To Approve MF-1 as Commission recommended with public restrictive covenant. (4/30/87) Mountain Shadow's Subdivision RELATED CASES: C15-85-288.56(RCA) Highway 71 and Mountain Shadow: the applicant is requesting to amend the existing public restrictive covenant on a portion of this property (Tract 2). This application is currently being reviewed. C14-2008-0125: West Oak Hill NPCD Oak Hill Combined Neighborhood Plan (Ordinance No. 20081211-097) EXISTING STREET CHARACTERISTICS: Street ROW Pavement Classification Sidewalks Bike Route Capital Metro (within ¼ mile) 50’ 0’ Level 1 None None None 50’ 20’ Level 2 None None None Sky Mountain Drive Mountain Shadows Drive W SH 71 150’ 75’ Level 5 None None None OTHER STAFF COMMENTS: Comprehensive Planning This rezoning case is located at the south terminus of Mountain Shadows Drive, the south side of Sky Mountain Drive and north side of State Highway 71. The 12.0-acre property is undeveloped and not located along an Activity Corridor. There is an Activity Centers for Redevelopment in Sensitive Environmental Areas located eight-tenths of a mile away. The property is located within the Oakhill Combined Neighborhood Planning Area (OCNPA) in West Oakhill. Surrounding land uses include single family housing, vacant land, an auto repair shop and a bilingual school to the north; to the south is State Highway 71 and south of the highway, a dentist office, a veterinarian clinic and an apartment complex; to the east are several Travis B-215 of 56C14-2020-0023 6 County government office buildings, a fire station, office buildings and an apartment complex; and to the west are a small single family subdivision and vacant land. Connectivity There are no bike lanes, public transit stops, or public sidewalks located along the two residential streets or State Highway 71, which abuts the subject property. A small residential subdivision located to the west has public sidewalks. There is a bilingual language school located approximately 1,000 feet north of this property. The mobility and connectivity options in the area are below average. Oakhill Combined Neighborhood Plan The OCNPA Future Land Use Map (FLUM) classifies this property as ‘Neighborhood Mixed Use;’ and ‘Mixed Residential.’ Tract 1 is under the FLUM category of Mixed Residential, which supports a variety of different housing types in one area, including single-family residential, townhouses, duplexes, and apartments; Zone M-1 is permitted under FLUM category. Tract 2 is under the FLUM category of Neighborhood Mixed Use, which is appropriate for a mix of neighborhood commercial (small scale retail or offices, professional services, convenience retail, and shop front retain that serves a market at a neighborhood scale) and small to medium-density residential uses; LR-MU is permitted in this FLUM category. The following text, goals, objectives and recommendations are taken from the Oakhill Combined Neighborhood Plan: • Goal 6.A. Provide opportunities for high-quality new development and redevelopment. o Objective 6A.1: Ensure quality of new construction and renovations. (p 66) • Goal 6.B. - Balance development and environmental protection by maintaining a vibrant residential and commercial community that demonstrates caring stewardship of the environment. (p 66) o Objective 6.B.1 - Encourage zoning to be compatible with existing and neighboring land uses and seek optimal and most appropriate use of land. • Goal 6.C: Create a mix of uses in existing corridors of commercial development that will provide a diversity of local services convenient to neighborhoods and establish commercial “nodes” (concentrated) (p 67) • Goal 6.E: Encourage locally-owned businesses to locate in the Oakhill area and find ways for local businesses and employers to prosper. (p 67) o Objective 6.E.1: Oakhill stakeholders desire more small-scale businesses with less strip commercial establishments. • Goal 8.A. Balance development and environmental protection by maintaining a vibrant residential and commercial community (p 120) B-216 of 56C14-2020-0023 7 o Objective 8.A.2 Design and place homes to minimize impacts on natural resources and the physical environment and to maximize social resources.  Recommendation 8.A.2a—Clustered development should be encouraged where appropriate.  Recommendation 8.A.2b—Residential density should be compatible with surrounding uses and informed by a regional vision of the environmental impact development has over the Edwards Aquifer.  Recommendation 8.A.2c—Whenever possible, new housing development should be located where existing services and infrastructure exist. Their appearance and density should be appropriate to its environment and compatible with surrounding uses. (p 126) o Objective 8.B. Preserve neighborhood identity, character, affordability, and diversity.  Recommendation 8.B.1a—For housing development/redevelopment projects where traffic impact is a concern, a traffic analysis should be done due to current traffic problems, long-term challenges of road expansion and improvement, and the overall lack of connectivity of the area (see Chapter 7: Transportation and Infrastructure). Such analysis should consider the adequacy of road connectivity, mobility, alternate transit modes, access, and condition. Chapter 9: Neighborhood Design • Goal 9.A. Require landscaping along roadways, sidewalks, bike paths, and around bus stops to provide shade in order to encourage pedestrian, bicycling, and mass transportation. • Goal 9.B. Enhance the Hill Country look of Oakhill by preserving trees. o Objective 9.B.1 The City Council should consider the application of the Hill Country Roadway Ordinance on U.S. Highway 290 and State Highway 71 and other roadways within the Oakhill neighborhood planning area to control signage, limit heights, plant trees, and to preserve the natural beauty of the environment. • Goal 9.C. Balance development and environmental protection by maintaining a vibrant residential and commercial community that demonstrates caring stewardship of the environment. (p 134) o Recommendation 9.C.2 b—Encourage developers to explore clustered development as an option, since it provides sufficient housing units while maintaining and preserving considerable amounts of open space. (p 135) • Goal 9.D. Preserve neighborhood identity, character, affordability, and diversity. (p. 135) o Objective 9.D.1 New single-family and multi-family developments/redevelopments should be compatible with existing residential B-217 of 56C14-2020-0023 8 architecture to reinforce the Hill Country character of Oakhill, in terms of materials, lighting, and height.  9.D.1a—Preserve Old German-style masonry and limestone construction.  9.D.1b—Place overhangs on roofs for shade.  9.D.1c—Provide abundant porch space.  9.D.1d—Utilize metal roofing or some other comparable material.  9.D.1e—Preserve character of old while incorporating sustainable green building practices. • Goal 9.E. Provide managed connectivity between various neighborhoods while maintaining the quiet enjoyment of neighborhoods. (p. 135) The proposed multi-family apartment complex does not include a mix of residential housing types or a mix of uses. While the proposed development would provide infill housing, the applicant’s request only partially supports the neighborhood plan because it does not provide a true mix of housing types and non-residential uses. Imagine Austin The property is located less than a mile from an ‘Activity Centers for Redevelopment in Sensitive Environmental Areas’ as identified on the Imagine Austin’s Growth Concept Map. “Five centers are located over the recharge or contributing zones of the Barton Springs Zone of the Edwards Aquifer or within water-supply watersheds. These centers are located on already developed areas and, in some instances, provide opportunities to address long-standing water quality issues and provide walkable areas in and near existing neighborhoods. State-of-the-art development practices will be required of any redevelopment to improve stormwater retention and the water quality flowing into the aquifer or other drinking water sources. These centers should also be carefully evaluated to fit within their infrastructural and environmental context.” One of the Land Use and Transportation policies, LUT P21 (p. 102), clarifies the intent, “Ensure that redevelopment in the Edwards Aquifer’s recharge and contributing zones maintains the quantity and quality of recharge of the aquifer.” This property is also within the “Other Development within City Limits” Growth Concept Map category. Page 107 of the IACP states, “While most new development will be absorbed by centers and corridors, development will happen in other areas within the city limits to serve neighborhood needs and create complete communities. The design of new development should be sensitive to and complement its context.” The following Imagine Austin policies are taken from Chapter 4 of the IACP, which specifically discusses infill development, including over environmentally sensitive land: Complete Community Policies • LUT P3. Promote development in compact centers, communities or along corridors that are connected by roads and transit, are designed to encourage walking and bicycling, and reduce healthcare, housing and transportation costs. B-218 of 56C14-2020-0023 9 • LUT P4. Protect neighborhood character by directing growth to areas of change that includes designated redevelopment areas, corridors and infill sites. Recognize that different neighborhoods have different characteristics and new and infill development should be sensitive to the predominant character of these communities. • LUT P5. Create healthy and family-friendly communities through development that includes a mix of land uses and housing types and affords realistic opportunities for transit, bicycle, and pedestrian travel and provides both community gathering spaces, parks and safe outdoor play areas for children. • HN P10. Create complete neighborhoods across Austin that have a mix of housing types and land uses, affordable housing and transportation options, and access to schools, retail, employment, community services, and parks and recreation options. The area around this proposed development lacks connectivity and mobility options, including public sidewalks, bike lanes, public transit stops, trails, local goods and services and civic uses such as parks and public schools. While this proposed project may provide additional residential units, it does not include a true mix of uses or mix of residential housing, and thus appears to only partially support the policies of the Imagine Austin Comprehensive Plan. B-219 of 56C14-2020-0023 10 B-2110 of 56C14-2020-0023 11 Environmental This site is not located over the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone. The site is in the Williamson Creek Watershed of the Colorado River Basin, which is classified as a Barton Springs Zone Watershed by Chapter 25-8 of the City’s Land Development Code. It is in the Drinking Water Protection Zone. According to floodplain maps there is no floodplain within or adjacent to the project location. At this time, site specific information is unavailable regarding vegetation, areas of steep slope, or other environmental features such as bluffs, springs, canyon rimrock, caves, sinkholes, and wetlands. A portion of the requested rezoning area (Tract 2) is subject to an existing Public RC. For areas outside of the RC, the following will apply: • Project applications at the time of this report are subject to the SOS Ordinance that allows 25% impervious cover in the contributing zone. • Standard landscaping and tree protection will be required in accordance with LDC 25-2 and 25-8 for all development and/or redevelopment. • Under current watershed regulations, development or redevelopment requires water quality control with increased capture volume and control of the 2-year storm on site. Runoff from the site is required to comply with pollutant load restrictions as specified in Land Development Code. Site Plan Site plans will be required for any new development other than single-family or duplex residential. Any development which occurs in an SF-6 or less restrictive zoning district which is located 540 feet or less from property which is in an SF-5 or more restrictive zoning district, or on which a use permitted in an SF-5 or more restrictive zoning district is located, will be subject to compatibility development regulations. Any new development is subject to Subchapter E. Design Standards and Mixed Use. Additional comments will be made when the site plan is submitted. Compatibility Standards The site is subject to compatibility standards. Along the western property line, the following standards apply on any section of the site adjacent to a property on which a use permitted in an SF-5 or more restrictive zoning district is located: • No structure may be built within 25 feet of the property line. • No structure in excess of two stories or 30 feet in height may be constructed within 50 feet of the property line. B-2111 of 56C14-2020-0023 12 • No structure in excess of three stories or 40 feet in height may be constructed within 100 feet of the property line. • No parking or driveways are allowed within 25 feet of the property line. • A landscape area at least 25 feet wide is required along the property line. In addition, a fence, berm, or dense vegetation must be provided to screen adjoining properties from views of parking, mechanical equipment, storage, and refuse collection. • For a structure more than 100 feet but not more than 300 feet from property zoned SF-5 or more restrictive, height limitation is 40 feet plus one foot for each 10 feet of distance in excess of 100 feet from the property line. • An intensive recreational use, including a swimming pool, tennis court, ball court, or playground, may not be constructed 50 feet or less from adjoining triggering property. • A landscape area at least 25 feet in width is required along the property line if the tract is zoned LR, GO, GR, L, CS, CS-1, or CH. Additional design regulations will be enforced at the time a site plan is submitted. Transportation The Austin Strategic Mobility Plan (ASMP) adopted 04/11/2019, calls for 78 feet of right-of- way for Mountain Shadows Drive. It is recommended that 78’ feet of right-of-way from the future centerline should be dedicated for Mountain Shadows Drive according to the Transportation Plan prior with the submittal of the first subdivision or site plan application. [LDC 25-6-51 and 25-6-55]. The TIA determination has been deferred to the site plan submittal, when land use and intensity will be finalized. Austin Water Utility The landowner intends to serve the site with City of Austin water and wastewater utilities. The landowner, at own expense, will be responsible for providing any water and wastewater utility improvements, offsite main extensions, utility relocations and or abandonments required by the land use. The water and wastewater utility plan must be reviewed and approved by Austin Water for compliance with City criteria and suitability for operation and maintenance. Based on current public infrastructure configurations, it appears that service extension requests (SER) will be required to provide service to this lot. For more information pertaining to the Service Extension Request process and submittal requirements contact Alberto Ramirez with Austin Water, Utility Development Services at 625 E. 10th St., 7th floor. Ph: 512-972-0211. B-2112 of 56C14-2020-0023 13 The landowner must pay the City inspection fee with the utility construction. The landowner must pay the tap and impact fee once the landowner makes an application for a City of Austin water and wastewater utility tap permit. INDEX OF EXHIBITS TO FOLLOW Exhibit A: Zoning Map Exhibit B: Aerial Map Exhibit C: Formal Petition Exhibit D: Correspondence Received B-2113 of 56O L D B E AG-NP E C A V E S R D MF-1-CO-NP 1 1 TR LO-MU-CO-NP RR-NP AVIS HILLS D OK RD R 1B CS-NP 2 R L D L E B RR-NP 1B 2 1A SF-3-NP 3 2 RR-NP 1 3 3 2 1 R AIN S D T W N U O O D M A H S L F 1 M O U N G 2 1 W/LO-CO-NP TAIN C K R E S 2 T D R CS-NP B21 O H MF-1-NP 1 2 S K Y M O U M P NTAIN D R RR-NP Q TRAVIS CO 5 LO-MU-NP RR-NP 1C 1A LO-CO-NP 1 2 RR-NP CS-NP 3 SF-2-CO-NP 21 O C L A D V E B E E S R D 20 SUNSET RIDGE CS-NP 58 59 1 MF-1-CO-NP 1 2 3 4 5 AG-NP A21 W S H 71 RR-NP C14-2020-0023 1 GR-NP 7A 2A 1 3 MF-1-NP 2 1 LO-NP PUD-NP 1 MF-1-NP 13 B20 W S H 71 PUD-NP 8A 9A A20 4 3 SF-6-NP 10A ± 1'' =500' SUBJECT TRACT ZONING BOUNDARY ! ! ! ! ! ! PENDING CASE CREEK BUFFER SF-2-CO-NP 57 58 RR-NP MF-1-NP 45 47 NANDAS 33 TRL 43 44 MF-1-NP 69 56 HIGHWAY 71 & MOUNTAIN SHADOWS ZONING CASE#: LOCATION: SUBJECT AREA: GRID: MANAGER: C14-2020-0023 8709 & 8701 Sky Mountain Dr; 8732 & 8624 W. State HWY 71 12.01 ACRES B21 KATE CLARK This map has been produced by the Communications Technology Management Dept. on behalf of the Planning Development Review Dept. for the sole purpose of geographic reference. No warranty is made by the City of Austin regarding specific accuracy or completeness. 14 1 LO-CO-NP 1 2 2 LR-NP 1 RR-NP 2 2 2 2 2 2 MF-1-CO-NP LR-NP MH-NP I E N M R E V L I S R D 31 MF-1-NP 10 9 8 7 6 12 11 13 14 5 4 15 3 4 3 2 1 C 1 2 3 4 5 LR-NP 2 1 1A 4A 6A 5A 50 49 48 46 3A R GE D OVERED BRID 5 6 C 4 3 2 1 B-2114 of 56O L D B E AG-NP E C A V E S R D MF-1-CO-NP 1 1 TR LO-MU-CO-NP RR-NP AVIS HILLS D OK RD R 1B CS-NP 2 R L D L E B RR-NP 1B 2 1A SF-3-NP 3 2 RR-NP 1 3 3 2 1 R AIN S D T W N U O O D M A H S L F 1 M O U N G 2 1 W/LO-CO-NP TAIN C K R E S 2 T D R CS-NP B21 O H MF-1-NP 1 2 S K Y M O U M P NTAIN D R RR-NP Q TRAVIS CO 5 LO-MU-NP RR-NP 1C 1A LO-CO-NP 1 2 RR-NP CS-NP 3 SF-2-CO-NP 21 O C L A D V E B E E S R D 20 SUNSET RIDGE CS-NP 58 59 1 MF-1-CO-NP 1 2 3 4 5 AG-NP A21 W S H 71 RR-NP C14-2020-0023 1 GR-NP 7A 2A 1 3 MF-1-NP 2 1 LO-NP 8A 9A A20 4 3 PUD-NP 1 MF-1-NP 13 B20 W S H 71 PUD-NP MF-1-NP 45 47 NANDAS 33 TRL 43 44 MF-1-NP 69 56 SF-2-CO-NP 57 58 RR-NP LO-CO-NP 1 2 LR-NP 2 MF-1-CO-NP RR-NP 2 2 2 2 2 Copyright nearmap 2015 2 1 14 1 LR-NP MH-NP I E N M R E V L I S R D 31 SF-6-NP 10A ± 1'' =500' SUBJECT TRACT ZONING BOUNDARY ! ! ! ! ! ! PENDING CASE CREEK BUFFER HIGHWAY 71 & MOUNTAIN SHADOWS ZONING CASE#: LOCATION: SUBJECT AREA: GRID: MANAGER: C14-2020-0023 8709 & 8701 Sky Mountain Dr; 8732 & 8624 W. State HWY 71 12.01 ACRES B21 KATE CLARK This map has been produced by the Communications Technology Management Dept. on behalf of the Planning Development Review Dept. for the sole purpose of geographic reference. No warranty is made by the City of Austin regarding specific accuracy or completeness. MF-1-NP 10 9 8 7 6 12 11 13 14 5 4 15 3 4 3 2 1 C 1 2 3 4 5 LR-NP 2 1 1A 4A 6A 5A 50 49 48 46 3A R GE D OVERED BRID 5 6 C 4 3 2 1 B-2115 of 56B-2116 of 56% 1 9 . 1 0 2 0 2 / 6 1 / 6 4 2 7 2 . 7 5 3 0 5 9 : e t a D : r e f f u B f o e g a t o o F e r a u q S l a t o T : r e f f u B n h t i i W s r e n o i t i t e P y b d e n w O e g a t o o F e r a u q S f o e g a t n e c r e P I N O T T E P I : r e b m u N e s a C 3 2 0 0 - 0 2 0 2 - 4 1 C s i r e f f u b e h t n h t i i w s l l a f t a h t l e c r a p e h t f o n o i t r o p e h t y l n o , r e f f u b e h t f o e g d e e h t s t c e s r e t n i l e c r a p a n e h W . l n o i t a u c l a c r o f d e s u t o n e r a r e f f u b t o o f 0 0 2 e h t n h t i i w l l a f t o n o d t a h t s l e c r a P . t c a r t t c e b u s j e h t f o t e e f 0 0 2 n h t i i w l l a f t a h t y a w j - f o - t h g i r t n e c a d a e h t f o f l a h - e n o g n d u l c n i i s e r u t a n g i s d i l a v h t i w s l e c r a P D A C T l l a f o a e r a e h t f o m u s e h t g n i k a t l y b d e t a u c l a c s i e g a t o o f e r a u q s l a t o t e h T : n o i t a u c l a C l j . t c a r t t c e b u s e h t e d u l c n i t o n s e o d r e f f u b e h t f o a e r a e h T . d e s u t n e c e r P a e r A n o i t i t e P e r u t a n g S i r e n w O s s e r d d A D I D A C T % 0 0 . 0 % 0 0 . 0 % 0 0 . 0 % 0 0 . 0 % 0 0 . 0 % 0 0 . 0 % 0 0 . 0 % 0 0 . 0 % 0 0 . 0 % 0 0 . 0 % 0 0 . 0 % 0 0 . 0 % 0 0 . 0 % 0 0 . 0 % 8 2 . 1 % 0 0 . 0 % 8 3 . 0 % 5 2 . 0 % 0 0 . 0 % 0 0 . 0 % 0 0 . 0 % 0 0 . 0 6 0 . 2 0 4 2 1 8 0 . 0 2 6 5 1 1 5 8 . 5 6 7 8 1 2 9 . 9 7 6 2 1 1 9 8 . 4 0 1 4 3 3 7 . 1 3 3 6 1 9 9 . 5 0 1 2 1 1 2 . 6 3 1 4 2 3 7 . 0 6 2 2 1 3 7 . 9 1 5 4 8 3 . 6 8 6 1 6 2 7 . 7 7 3 0 6 9 1 . 4 4 2 4 1 8 . 8 1 1 2 1 6 3 . 2 2 0 7 1 4 6 . 1 5 6 3 2 0 . 8 9 3 2 7 2 . 0 8 5 3 0 9 . 1 4 5 1 9 9 0 . 1 9 1 8 8 9 7 . 3 9 7 4 3 9 4 . 1 5 3 6 7 1 % 1 9 . 1 5 8 . 4 8 8 8 1 9 o n o n o n o n o n o n o n o n o n o n o n o n o n o n s e y o n s e y s e y o n o n o n o n N O T R O N H T E B A Z I L E A R U A L & D R A W D E L R A C N O T R O N 5 3 7 8 7 R D S W O D A H S N A T N U O M 1 0 3 6 I 2 0 2 0 8 4 1 0 1 0 R E L L I M N Y R R E M & L R E H P O T S I R H C M E H C E M 5 3 7 8 7 R D S W O D A H S N A T N U O M 0 1 2 6 I 6 0 1 0 8 4 1 0 1 0 I C L L E V R D E G D R B D E R E V O C I I L M A F P P 6 3 7 8 7 1 7 Y H E T A T S W 5 1 7 8 0 3 3 0 8 4 2 0 4 0 L E I N A D Z E U G R D O R I L E I N A D Z E U G R D O R I J A T R E B O R E T I H W Y T N U O C S I V A R T 5 3 7 8 7 R D S W O D A H S N A T N U O M 8 0 2 6 I 5 0 1 0 8 4 1 0 1 0 5 3 7 8 7 R D S W O D A H S N A T N U O M 4 0 2 6 I 3 0 1 0 8 4 1 0 1 0 5 3 7 8 7 R D S W O D A H S N A T N U O M 6 0 2 6 I 4 0 1 0 8 4 1 0 1 0 6 3 7 8 7 1 7 Y H E T A T S W 3 2 2 0 4 4 2 0 4 0 I C L L G N D L O H D N A L E G D R B D E R E V O C I Y E D S D R A W D E M A R A L C & T C R E Y E D I R J A D L O R A H N O S D U H I A D Y L S E L A Z N O G I C L L A C N A T S E V D N U F L L E B C L L S E I T R E P O R P R E H C E B N I T S U A F O Y T I C N I T S U A F O Y T I C W A R D N A S & R E L D A S N A R B S E N O I J I E N A L E H T I D U J T T E G G E L I E N A L E H T I D U J T T E G G E L D M A I L L I W X R A M 5 3 7 8 7 R D S W O D A H S N A T N U O M 9 0 2 6 I 5 0 2 0 8 4 1 0 1 0 5 3 7 8 7 R D S W O D A H S N A T N U O M 3 0 3 6 I 1 0 2 0 8 4 1 0 1 0 5 3 7 8 7 R D S W O D A H S N A T N U O M I 3 0 4 0 4 4 1 0 1 0 I 5 3 7 8 7 R D N A T N U O M Y K S 3 0 8 8 1 0 5 0 4 4 1 0 1 0 5 3 7 8 7 D R S E V A C E E B D L O 2 0 7 0 4 4 1 0 1 0 6 3 7 8 7 1 7 Y H E T A T S W 4 0 2 0 8 4 2 0 4 0 6 3 7 8 7 1 7 Y H E T A T S W 0 6 6 8 8 1 2 0 4 4 2 0 4 0 5 3 7 8 7 1 7 Y H E T A T S W 1 3 7 8 9 2 3 0 8 4 2 0 4 0 I 5 3 7 8 7 R D N A T N U O M Y K S 0 0 8 8 2 0 4 0 4 4 1 0 1 0 I 5 3 7 8 7 R D N A T N U O M Y K S 2 0 7 8 1 0 4 0 4 4 1 0 1 0 5 3 7 8 7 1 7 Y H E T A T S W 6 7 7 8 5 0 3 0 7 4 2 0 1 0 5 3 7 8 7 1 7 Y H E T A T S W 1 0 8 8 3 0 3 0 8 4 2 0 4 0 I E E N R E H T A K & M Y R A L L I H N O T S N H O J 5 3 7 8 7 N I T S U A R D S W O D A H S N A T N U O M 1 1 2 6 I 3 0 2 0 8 4 1 0 1 0 d n u o F t o N s s e r d d A 1 0 5 0 4 4 2 0 4 0 d n u o F t o N s s e r d d A 1 0 4 0 8 4 1 0 1 0 l a t o T B-2117 of 56B-2118 of 568809 A & B Mountain Shadows Cove, Austin, TX 78735  Within 200 feet of the subject tract for Case # C14‐2020‐0023  512-731-2330 CAUTION: This email was received at the City of Austin, from an EXTERNAL source. Please use caution when clicking links  or opening attachments. If you believe this to be a malicious and/or phishing email, please forward this email to  CSIRT@austintexas.gov.   2 B-2119 of 56 B-2120 of 56 B-2121 of 56 B-2122 of 56 B-2123 of 56 B-2124 of 56B-2125 of 56B-2126 of 56B-2127 of 56B-2128 of 56B-2129 of 56B-2130 of 56B-2131 of 56B-2132 of 56B-2133 of 56B-2134 of 56B-2135 of 56B-2136 of 56B-2137 of 56B-2138 of 56B-2139 of 56B-2140 of 56B-2141 of 56B-2142 of 56B-2143 of 56B-2144 of 56B-2145 of 56B-2146 of 56B-2147 of 56B-2148 of 56B-2149 of 56B-2150 of 56B-2151 of 56June 10, 2020 Kate Clark Senior Planner City of Austin Planning and Zoning Department P.O. Box 1088, Austin, Texas, 78767 Via email: kate.clark@austjntexas.gov RE: File Number C14-2020-0023 and C14-85-288.56(RCA) Dear Ms. Clark, Based upon additional the Mountain and is no longer in opposition of Covenants, Declaration Members have agreed to. Thank you for your assistance contact me. discussions and conditions supports agreed to with the developer of and restrictive the proposed covenant the rezoning amendment project, Shadows Cove Neighborhood to the proposed project. The Developer Has Agreed to the Attached Conditions and Restrictions the Mountain Shadows Cove Owners Association in this matter. If you need additional information, please feel free to Sain Michelle President of Mountain Shadows Cove Owners Association in Oak Hill, Austin 512-731-2330 8809 A & B Mountain Shadows Cove, Austin, TX 78735 Within 200 feet of the subject tract for Case# C14-2020-0023 B-2152 of 56B-2153 of 56 DATE: February 20, 2020 FROM: Oak Hill Association of Neighborhoods RE: OHAN Membership Support for Mountain Shadows Community Statement in opposition to proposed rezoning To Whom It May Concern: At the Oak Hill Association of Neighborhoods’ regular membership meeting on February 19, 2020, OHAN’s membership unanimously approved a motion in support of the Mountain Shadows Community’s position stated below. The developer’s agent made a presentation at OHAN’s January 15 regular membership meeting, so this was an informed decision based on presentations from the Mountain Shadows Community and the applicant. Sincerely, Cynthia Wilcox President, Oak Hill Association of Neighborhoods B-2154 of 56Mountain Shadows Community Position Statement Mountain Shadows Drive is classified by the City of Austin as a substandard street. The street is only 16.5 feet wide (a generous measurement); and it has no shoulders, side of the street parking, or sidewalks. School buses are typically 8 to 9 feet wide; and pickup trucks 6.5 to 7 feet wide. A school bus and a pickup could not safely pass each other on Mountain Shadows Drive without leaving the pavement. Two schools, the Austin Eco Bilingual School and the Monarch Suzuki Academy, are located on this street. Parents bringing their children to these two schools presently park on the pavement during peak traffic hours. Mountain Shadows Drive is the sole exit for the neighborhood. There are limited sight lines at the exit to Old Bee Caves negatively affecting the egress – a curve feet to the south and the intersection of Travis Cook Road to the north. The land between Mountain Shadows Drive and Hwy 71 is covered by a restricted covenant. The covenant states that a building permit for the site on this tract “shall not be issued until Mountain Shadows Road has been constructed from State Hwy 71 to the north property line at 44 feet of pavement within 70 feet of right-of-way, or at a design standard as otherwise may be approved by the city.” The courts have generally ruled that when restrictive covenants are at variance with development codes the more restrictive standards shall be applied. The extension of Mountain Shadow Drive is included in the Austin Strategic Mobility Plan (ASMP). The ASMP also has a project identified for the existing section of Mountain Shadows Drive. This project would include reconstructing the street to urban standards with curb and gutter, two vehicle travel lanes, all ages and abilities bicycle facilities, and sidewalks. Both the new roadway project and the project to expand the existing roadway would be coordinated closely to minimize any impacts to affected property owners and ensure consistency along all of Mountain Shadows Drive. However according the ASMP team “the city does not have an active project to construct it, nor has any funding been identified to pursue this project. At this time, it is simply a concept that is desired based on mobility and safety needs in anticipation of future growth” A rezoning application has been filed to rezone the tracts of land between Mountain Shadows Drive and Hwy 71. The request includes modifying language to allow the extension of Mountain Shadow Drive by the developer to 25 feet of pavement with 50 feet of Right of Way. The draft of the Austin Street Design for a Level 2 road such as Mountain Shadow recommends a minimum of 26 foot of pavement with 74 feet Right of Way. The optimal design for a Level 2 road is a pavement width of 26 feet, and a 92-foot Right of Way with 40-foot pavement to allow for bicycle lanes, sidewalks, curbs, and roadside parking. The proposed extension by the developer would not ensure consistency along all of Mountain Shadows Drive as called for in the Austin Strategic Mobility Plan. Future roads should not be constructed at less than minimum standards but should be constructed to optimize future growth and in accordance with the restricted covenant. 1. Neither a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) or a Neighborhood traffic analysis has been provided to the affected neighborhood. According to the Austin government website, a TIA is required if the expected number of trips generated by the project exceeds 2,000 vehicle trips per day, and a neighborhood traffic analysis is required if the trips generated exceed 300 vehicle trips per day over the existing uses. Estimation of traffic per family unit is estimated as high as 20 trips per day. Even at half that, the 234 unit proposed complex B-2155 of 56would place 2,340 more vehicles a day either turning onto a substandard road or attempting egress onto Hwy 71. 2. Safety is a major concern. In the last year there has been at least one fatality on that section of Hwy 71 from a vehicle exiting an apartment complex and a hit and run accident involving a teenage pedestrian on Mountain Shadow Drive. Children exiting vehicles parked at the local schools would also be at increased risk. 3. Research has shown that when streets designed to carry a high volume of traffic (like Hwy 71/290) are overloaded or there is a congested intersection (such as the Y at Hwy 290/71 or William Cannon/ 290) motorists tend to seek residential streets for shortcutting. The Texas Department of Transportation has described Hwy 290/71 as the 53rd most congested roadway in the state. Construction scheduled for this roadway is likely to increase this congestion for the next few years. It is logical to assume that motorists will tend to use Mountain Shadow Drive as a shortcut, increasing neighborhood safety problems. 4. The proposed development and road extension would affect reasonable access for emergency and transit services. A fire department is located near the proposed exit on Hw71, and increased traffic could delay response times. There are presently no transit services near the proposed complex. Decreasing pavement size would hinder the future development of safe transit stops. In addition to the road problems, the proposed rezoning would contribute to other neighborhood concerns. 1. Police staffing is limited at this time, especially in the outlying areas of the city. The infusion of over 234 new residents in this one complex would exacerbate this situation. 2. Public schools would be adversely affected by the influx of new students. Small Middle School serves the students in this neighborhood. The student teacher ratio at Small Middle is 18:1, which is higher that the Texas state level of 15:1 and has increased from 16:1 over five school years. Oak Hill Middle School has class size averages that are above district and state averages. Austin High School has a student teacher ratio of 16.7:1; fifteen of the high schools in the Austin Independent School District have better student/teacher ratios. 3. There are no parks in the neighborhood. The proposed extension does not even include 4. The proposed development is near the Barton Creek Habitat Preserve and will negatively affect local wildlife in the neighborhood. 5. The proposed development will increase the noise pollution and light pollution in the bike paths neighborhood. 6. The proposed zoning favors corporate and absentee investors to the detriment of homeowners and small local developers. The proposed tracts are now appropriately zoned to allow for residential, light commercial, civic, and agricultural uses. We respectfully request that you reject the proposed rezoning and the inadequate extension of Mountain Shadow Drive. B-2156 of 56